Re: Democratic process

Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_bab-S0/[email protected]> Thu, 29 Sep 2016 22:24:28 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.network.freenet.devel
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Ian Clarke writes:

> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 2:56 PM, Arne Babenhauserheide arne_bab-S0/[email protected]
> wrote:This, written in a thread where I show a cleaner method of evaluation
>
> along with an implementation of a way to see which reasoning can
>
> actually be taken from the poll as it was conducted.
>
>
> What is your specific proposal, because apparently I missed it. All I saw were
> you mentioning a variety of alternatives that are not suitable because they do
> not retain the ordinality of people's estimates.

My specific proposal is to use several different methods of ordering the
tasks by the votes given (value divided by cost estimate) and taking a
subset which is highly ranked in all the different methods of evaluation
(except for the ill-defined one which divides the mean by the spread of
the votes). This is the set for which it is possible to give the robust
answer that it is preferred by the people casting the votes.

When I do that with the top 10, I get 6 which are ranked in all the
methods. Even just using mean and median should at least make this a bit
more resilient.

I do not find the word ordinality in my dictionary. What does it mean exactly?

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein
ohne es zu merken

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 818 B)